---
id: "counter-workarounds-may-be-ux"
type: "counter-perspective"
source_timestamps: ["¶2", "¶11"]
tags: ["counter-perspective", "ux", "critique"]
related: ["concept-customer-workaround", "contrarian-workarounds-are-prototypes"]
challenges: "The claim that a workaround reliably signals unmet willingness to pay for a new business model."
sources: ["commercial"]
sourceVaultSlug: "hbr-seg-commercial"
originDay: 5
articleStem: "hbr-tier2-09-customer-workarounds"
sourceUrl: "https://hbr.org/2026/05/what-customer-workarounds-can-reveal-about-your-business-model"
sourceTitle: "What Customer Workarounds Can Reveal About Your Business Model"
---
# Counter: Workarounds May Indicate Poor UX, Not a New Business Model

**Counter-perspective (from adjacent IS/process literature via the enrichment overlay):** The academic literature on workarounds supports the idea that they signal *process misalignment* — but **not every workaround implies unmet willingness to pay**. Some simply reflect interface friction, governance gaps, or avoidable complexity.

**Implication:** Before treating a [[concept-customer-workaround]] as a [[concept-shadow-business-model]] prototype, screen for the mundane explanation: is this a monetizable new use case, or a UX defect that should just be fixed? This qualifies [[contrarian-workarounds-are-prototypes]] and [[action-reframe-workarounds]].

**Related:** [[concept-customer-workaround]] · [[counter-compliance-not-signal]] · [[counter-effort-not-wtp]]